2 
In short, recombinant DNA research is thriving. Why remove controls 
before consensus in the scientific community has been reached and before the 
results of the NIH-sponsored program of risk assessment are in? 
In addition to results from the risk assessment program, there are 
at least two pieces of information that are likely to affect perceptions 
of recombinant DNA risks in the near future. First, there will be results 
from the Rowe and Martin experiement with polyoma virus DNA (To be published 
this fall). Second, there will be the independent analysis being conducted 
by Dr. Sydney Brenner of the MRC Laboratory for Molecular Biology, 
Cambridge, U.K. Dr. Brenner, as you know, was a member of the original Berg 
commitee and has consulted with the RAC. In a personal communication, he 
writes: "I now feel that the whole method of risk assessment used up to 
now is fragmentary, if not wrong, and that what is needed is a more systematic 
approach which I have tried to make." (September 12, 1978.). 
Surely the rational approach is to wait, and to see what further risk 
assessment experiments and analysis produces and to make policy decisions 
on that basis. Rushing the revisions through this fall seems entirely 
unjustified. 
Finally, I would like to endorse the position statement of the 
Coalition for Responsible Genetic Research on revision's. The Coalition feels 
that the proposed incremental changes in the present elite decision-making 
structures are inadequate. It also needs emphasis that "consultation," 
i.e., the provision of testimony at public hearings, is a quite different 
matter from sharing in actual decisions. Structural and procedural changes 
are badly needed to make possible full participation in decision-making by 
representatives of labor, environmental and consumer advocacy groups, 
public health officials, and government agencies with potential regulatory 
responsibility for recombinant DNA activities. Only in this way can there 
be confidence that public policy decisions for recombinant DNA technology 
are in the public interest. 
Sincere ly , 
Susan Wright, Ph.D. 
Member, Executive Committee 
Coalition for Responsible Genetic 
Research. 
SW/mks 
[A-227] 
